It has taken 155 years and an obstinate trainer who wasn't going to ditch his rider simply because she was the wrong sex, but a female jockey has won the Melbourne Cup. Still, not everyone has cottoned on to the change in women's sport that Michelle Payne and others represent. Tracey Holmes writes.

"And everyone else can get stuffed."

Too right, Michelle. It's 2015. Time to get with the program and the program is that champion athletes are champion athletes - male or female.

Victorian jockey Michelle Payne has etched her name into the record books. She won this country's most prized horse race. That, itself, puts her in an elite club. The fact that she's the first female to win the Melbourne Cup puts it in a category all on its own - a record that cannot be erased.

Payne has proven herself to be another of Australia's great athletes who have ignored the doubters, pushed through the barriers and smashed another glass ceiling on the way to that mythical sports land known as "the level playing field".

The ABC's Gerard Whateley called yesterday's winning moment like this:

"A female jockey has won the Melbourne Cup."

Yes, indeed. It has taken 155 years and an obstinate trainer who wasn't going to shaft his champion rider simply because she was the wrong sex in the eyes of those who pay his salary.

Could those owners who wanted to kick Payne off their horse and give the ride to a male jockey please step forward? No. I didn't think so.

As is tradition the jockey was interviewed only moments after crossing the finish line on a 100-1 outsider, Prince of Penzance. She was remarkably calm given she'd just won the race every Australian jockey dreams of and so few achieve. In that, she's no different to male jockeys: the Beadmans, the Munces, the Cassidys and the Olivers.

After dismounting she was interviewed again. This time her comments were as memorable as her ride.

To think that (trainer) Darren Weir has given me a go and it's such a chauvinistic sport, I know some of the owners were keen to kick me off, and John Richards and Darren stuck strongly with me...and I can't say how grateful I am to them.

I want to say to everyone else, get stuffed, because women can do anything and we can beat the world.

Could those owners who wanted to kick Payne off their horse and give the ride to a male jockey please step forward?

No. I didn't think so.

When you work up the courage please do identify yourselves and we'll spin you around and point you back towards the turn of the century where you'll feel a lot more comfortable. Not last century, the one before - where one of the founders of modern sport, Baron Pierre de Coubertin, also thought there was no place for women in the physically demanding sports arena.

Payne's ride was impeccable. Last out of the blocks but ridden to perfection on a horse nobody rated, well almost nobody - Payne's brother Stevie, the strapper, had $10 each way. She was not intimidated by the favourites, or the reputations of the 23 other jockeys; nor the doubters in her own camp.

Her demeanour only moments after riding past the winning post was more controlled than many male jockey's that have been in the same position and yet, there was this…

"Payne was ecstatic after the race and could hardly contain her excitement." What? Who?

Not the remarkably coherent jockey the world saw interviewed on Channel 7 yesterday. That description sounds like some seven year old at the Easter show that's about to pee his/her pants after a ride on a ferris wheel.

Compare it to the way other Melbourne Cup victories have been reported in recent years:

Ryan Moore, on Protectionist in 2014:

"Moore has long been regarded by many as the best jockey in the world and the 31-year-old Englishman showed he had few peers with a nerveless ride…" Regarded. Few peers. Nerveless.

Damien Oliver, on Fiorente in 2013:

"It was a personal triumph for jockey Damien Oliver who was suspended over a betting charge last year, and controversially allowed back to riding in time for this year's spring carnival." Personal triumph.

Glenn Boss, on Makybe Diva in 2003:

"Boss said he had enjoyed a perfect run on the five-year-old mare…" Perfect run.

More than 100 years after modern day sports founders declared that sport was not good for women's health the media still hasn't quite cottoned on that patronising language is a concept that's also a little out dated.

The BBC's racing correspondent, Cornelius Lysaght, saw it this way, "To have beaten Frankie Dettori, the most famous jockey in the world…can only add to the sense of achievement. A red-letter day for the once oh-so-macho world of Aussie sport."

That once oh-so-macho world of Aussie sport has faced a reckoning in 2015. Teams that have demanded a fair share of the international stage's limelight this year have included the Matildas, the Hockeyroos, the Diamonds, the Jillaross and the Southern Stars. Individuals who've beaten the rest by being the best include kayakers, surfers, swimmers and Paralympic sprinters.

Along with supportive player unions, and in some cases governing bodies, female athletes have this year demanded better pay conditions, negotiated new broadcast commitments and Olympic games rights holders, Channel 7, have even committed to a women's sports channel.

Australia's female athletes are at the top of their game right now. Not because they are female, because they are good at what they do. And yesterday at Flemington Michelle Payne did it better than anyone else.

Tracey Holmes is a senior reporter/presenter at ABC's NewsRadio. She focuses on sport and its wider implications.

Comments (259)

Comments for this story are closed.

Grant:

04 Nov 2015 11:13:56am

I'm all for women getting equal pay when they do the same amount of sporting performance and when they attract the same amount of advertisers and crowds. It's nice to be an idealist, but quite often that leads to realities being forgotten. I congratulate this young woman on a fine effort in the cup. And her words to doubters against female jockeys are to be applauded. Her bluntness, is to be especially welcomed from a sports person. If only other more prominent Aussies athletes were allowed to have that luxury of being so outspoken without the media hyping it and taking things out of context

Sam:

04 Nov 2015 11:34:06am

You do realise that due to her past accidents the owners had a right to want someone else. Shame she is so sexist she slandered the owners rather than look at the reasons for their choice. Yet another person that yells sexism when they may not get their way.

Interesting we latter find from her she almost clipped the heels of the horse in front of her. Yet more justification for the owners opinions.

ibast:

04 Nov 2015 12:13:55pm

" she almost clipped the heels of the horse in front of her. Yet more justification for the owners opinions."

Fair go. Trip to Paris fell in a hole about the 400m market and she did well to miss it. Have a look at when Max dynamites jockey had to do to miss the mess. In fact I'd say that was a good ride if it wasn't for the fact the jockey go him boxed in in the first place.

Rhonda:

05 Nov 2015 2:59:14pm

"Just steered the thing." - Apart from the fact that the horse is a very large living animal, running in the company of others, any of whom can change direction unexpectedly (unlike cars, they don't have indicators) that is.

Surely Michelle Payne deserves her 'moment in the sun' for having grown up in a large family, not a privileged one, went without financially and socially, worked hard in a male-dominated field and achieved every Australian jockey's dream? The fact that she is the first female to ever win in its 155 year history is the icing on the cake.

dafall:

John Coochey :

04 Nov 2015 1:31:45pm

So a woman wins the Melbourne cup and good luck to her! Without affirmative action or quotas, things are looking up. So now we get rid of all gender barriers in sport including tennis and athletics? After all it is feminist/ABC dogma that they make as good as troops as men but try telling that to any infantryman who has had to carry their equipment for them.

Tom1:

John: I try to resist the temptation of thinking that all conservatives have the same thought processes as you.

The ABC has been generally rounded on for being biased in its political reporting. I put that down to astuteness. Now they, and I assume you mean all ABC journalists, are pushing the feminists barrow.

I think it is a good story, make a marvellous film, but as a leading jockey said, probably will not change much. Women are better at some things than men, and vice versa. Many things they can do equally well. However discrimination because of sex is abominable.

Graeme Birds Mirror:

05 Nov 2015 11:38:49am

Mr Coochey,In your next reincarnation,should a women follishly hoos up with you you can get her to slave over you hand and foot 24/7.But in this liftime and from your solitary darkrned basement,spare us the speculations you ponder about a real world you take zero functional or productive part in.You know as much about women and serving ones country as you do about comedic timing.

Mena Reno:

05 Nov 2015 3:13:21pm

Speak for yourself. JC's points are valid even though it obviously gets tiring to phrase them in a way that can always be understood. Query his ideas by all meams, or ask for clarification if they sound a little off, but there's no reason to denigrate him personally.

From the Fortress:

04 Nov 2015 2:40:39pm

JC, it seems that every time you open your mouth, or in this case, text box, you say something stupid. For someone who espouses intimate knowledge of the ADF you display an amazing ignorance of the actual subject

'After all it is feminist/ABC dogma that they make as good as troops as men but try telling that to any infantryman who has had to carry their equipment for them.'

lazarus:

John Coochey:

04 Nov 2015 3:50:14pm

Does does does! Try telling that to my mate in the Reserves who has had two tours to Afghanistan. The ex head of ADFA was on ABC radio a few months ago boasting about how he had changed the load carrying requirments for women so that more could pass out as graduates. Look at Jackie Lambie on a pension because of back injuries allegedly brought about by carrying an infantry pack. OK sometimes women can get cut up like a man I know of one who hadn't even graduated who lost all four fingures on one hand when a hatch fell on them during a training exercise but she was not front line infantry.

John Coochey:

05 Nov 2015 8:15:07am

The article may have been about a horse race but the comment was about women in physically demanding environments. In the case of a jockey light weight is not desirable it is essential so there is no reason why women should not perform well. There is a politically correct contradiction that women are the equal of men in all combat roles but those claiming this do not push for the end of gender distinction in sport nor accept that much domestic violence has a female perpetrator. I could develop arguments about issues with women in the military but that would indeed be going off topic.

revitup:

04 Nov 2015 5:28:57pm

"Doesn't happen" during recruit training or infantry training, yet when posted to a battalion, A woman's role goes from being a grunt(infantryperson) to being a batman(read personal assistant) for the officers in BHQ, or as radio operators/ drivers for the officers in charge of the various company`s, no more foot slogging or digging and living in foxholes. The other infantrymen carry their own sleeping and eating needs on their backs, carrying weapons and ammunition, whilst the batwomen,radio ops and drivers have their gear transported around in vehicles.

ig:

05 Nov 2015 7:22:15am

Yes about time the ABC supported the continuing sexism in tennis, cricket, soccer, basketball.

About time all sporting competitions had no gender barriers. ONE competition were both males and females compete and the best wins( and tales the money).....Opps the feminists will not like this idea, they like the gender discrimination when it suits them !

traveller:

05 Nov 2015 9:39:31am

revitup, the army has always been a boys club, it was when I served and from what I am told it still is. The same could be said for when I worked as a policeman and then as a correctional officer. Male dominated professions take a long time to change their culture. I can only say congratulations to the young woman and good luck in the future but don't expect any immediate softening towards women jockeys in horse racing.

TP:

05 Nov 2015 12:42:02pm

I thought the real reason why women didn't go into combat was because men can't handle it when women soldiers get killed or injured. It disheartens them and they can't fight properly. That was a reason in Israel why women were not allowed to fight on the front lines.

John51:

04 Nov 2015 1:08:35pm

Sam, are you an insider in the horse racing industry to base your over the top criticisms on and even if your are I can't see them as valid criticisms anyway. I find it strange with what is a good feel story of success against all odds of winning on the back of a horse which the bookies put at 100 to 1 odds to win you instead attack her.

You must live in a very different universe if you don't think sexism exists in the racing industry when it comes to female jockies getting rids on the best horses.

For me I think it is a great story with the first female Jocky not only winning the Melbourne Cup, but winning on a horse given odds of a 100 to 1 on a win. I have to wonder how much the odds given on the horse winning the Melbourne Cup were only based on the capacity of the horse or did the bookies put those odds because she was a female Jocky. If it was the latter than she is well and truely justified in all of her criticisms of the horse racing industry. Good on her is all I can say.

John Coochey:

04 Nov 2015 3:54:16pm

Well I do not think a woman jockey had anything to do with it but if it did more fool them. And I rejoice in her success. I have a friend a vet who now refuses to deal with race horses because he says the only way to make money honestly from horses is with a wheel barrow and a shovel. He was constantly being asked for drugs to either make the horses go faster or slower. The latter is well prior to the big race and then stopped so the horse wins and then swabs clean.

barsnax:

hassa:

04 Nov 2015 6:20:50pm

JC,You are an idiot , your comments about a single Vet is rubbish,I am a horse trainer and all the vets I deal with will not prescribe drugs that may be detected without giving a time period for the drug to leave the horses system before racing , Vets are loathe to attend stewards hearings because it is time consuming and costs them money in the long run.

Sure the odd mistake could be made because horses like humans have different metabolisms and drugs in some horses take longer to leave the body than another horse.

Similar to alcohol in humans ,one person will read a different result to another if the same amount of alcohol is ingested.

" I do not think a woman jockey had anything to do with it" well that is a comment from an ignorant person!

People run red lights in their cars too, and break the law , similarly their are crooks in all industries.

awake:

04 Nov 2015 2:30:33pm

Oh give up the lot of you. Where is your sportsmanship. She is sexist, clipped the heels of another horse. Others have had to be cleared of betting scandals, bribing, holding horses back and various other scandals and not had this sort of crap thrown at them.

Fred:

04 Nov 2015 3:02:25pm

Almost clipping heels implies no negligence on behalf of a jockey. It is a thing that happens every day, in any old race. The horse whose heels she almost clipped was tiring and falling back on her in a tightly bunched field. What was she supposed to do - jump over it?

Fred:

04 Nov 2015 3:09:33pm

Almost clipping heels is a daily occurrence in racing. It implies no fault or negligence from a rider. The horse in front of her, whose heels she narrowly avoided, was tiring and falling back on her in a tightly packed field. What would you have her do - jump over it?

Freddie Frog:

If champion athletes are champion athletes no matter their gender, then they can do as Michelle has and compete against the men in the same competitions. I'm sure the author would be supportive right?

As for the different reporting between this and previous cups, are you seriously trying to compare the win of a 100-1 shot that no one thought would win (helped by track bias and a farcical race pace) with previous cups won by much better horses ridden by jockeys that have copious amounts of group 1 wins to their names?

Good Grief:

04 Nov 2015 11:29:07am

Ah... how the left narrative changes. 2 days ago, horse racing was just another senseless excuse to gamble on animal cruelty; a relic from yesteryear's chauvinistic society. Today, it's the champion of women's progress and everything good that will save this forsaken earth from its demise (even if the man/woman is simply riding on top of the creature doing the hard yards).

If anybody should be attributed to the winning the cup, it should be the horse. I highly doubt the colorful imps that ride them are pulling their weight here. Also for the record, this isn't the first female to win a horse race; plenty of mares have made their mark in racing history long before we were concerned about what gender is the 80 lb sack of flesh we have been put on their back.

whogoesthere:

04 Nov 2015 1:10:20pm

Like when Australia won the America's Cup ?.

Pretty much any kind of 'first' makes the news. If the jockey had been a black refugee or something it would have been 'news' too. Add in the local flavour, the disabled brother, the long odds, it's a media dream !.

mike j:

When we won the America's Cup, no-one claimed that the reason we'd never won it before was racism.

We'd never won it before because the Americans were (and still are) better than us (and everyone else) at that event.

Yet when a woman finally succeeds at something, the media narrative falls all over itself trying to justify female underachievement by confecting a historical culture of sexism. It's as sad as it is transparent.

A woman won, great. Let's treat her like a grown adult instead of a child who just brought home a drawing we need to fuss over and put on the fridge.

Henry:

05 Nov 2015 6:54:28am

Its a big thing because a woman has never won the Melbourne Cup before - ever in 150 years? Its history making. It also sends a clear message of what women can achieve if given half a chance. That is vitally important. Why is it so hard for people to grasp that?

Australians love an underdog winning. Though just not those who beat the men?

Freddie Frog:

Henry:

05 Nov 2015 9:27:07am

So you think that a woman winning the cup for the first time in history is not a major thing? You think she wasn't an underdog, even though many believed it was impossible for a woman to win? Even the owners didn't believe in her. I can't imagine why you would have trouble seeing her as an underdog and don't think you WANT to see the significance, Fred.

The fact she was also riding a horse that was 100-1 made the win even more special. There were two factors here that put her in the "underdog" category.

Freddie Frog:

Who are these many people who "believed it was impossible for a woman to win"?

No one who knows anything about racing that's for sure.

"even the owners didn't believe in her"

Who were the owners that wanted her dropped simply because she was a woman?

Oh you mean you only listened to her post race comments and have taken them as gospel that she's been hard done by simply because she's a woman?

If the owners really 100% wanted another jockey, they would have had another jockey.

And let me give you the tip, all jockeys think they're treated unfairly, they all don't like getting dropped off of rides. They all cop loads of abuse when trainers, owners, the public think they've ridden badly. And it's often got absolutely zero to do with their riding abilities when they do. Personality clashes, ignorance and simple mistakes can all cause issues. The industry is just as much about building relationships as it is about pure skills.

But apparently that's only important in this case because she's a woman right?

Henry:

05 Nov 2015 11:37:49am

"Who were the owners that wanted her dropped simply because she was a woman?"

As the article stated, those who wanted to drop her are keeping a very, VERY low profile. Who wants to publically come out and admit they were wrong and a sexist to boot? If Michelle Payne had lied, the owners would be out in force to declare their innocence. The fact that no one is saying anything, is very telling.

Freddie Frog:

Or the mythical owners who wanted her booted off (if they actually did) did so for a myriad of reasons other than sexism? And Michelle has basically bitten the hand that feeds her?

I've seen owners want a rider booted off when another horse bumped theirs in the straight with absolutely zero fault from their own rider. Owners and trainers aren't always the most rational of people when it comes to their horses particularly in big races

The Melbourne cup only happens once a year and horses might only get one shot. Is it really surprising that owners might want the most experienced and accomplished riders on their horses in a $7 million dollar race?

Henry:

05 Nov 2015 1:07:29pm

Well Freddie, lets hear what those owners have to say. Lets hear it publically and put the matter to rest. Where are those owners anyway? And where are all the news stories reporting their reaction to Michelle's comments? Its all strangely silent.

I also doubt she'll regret her words, but no doubt some will try to shut her up. Don't want her highlighting the sexism in racing, now do we?

And as for wanting the most experience riders, Michelle Payne has been riding for 15 years. That's experienced. And she also won the race, so I'd say her abilities were not an issue.

Freddie Frog:

Henry,If you've been following, every owner asked has said they fully supported Michelle. Now either they're telling the truth or they simply don't want to get involved in this sort of faux scandal.

"I also doubt she'll regret her words, but no doubt some will try to shut her up. Don't want her highlighting the sexism in racing, now do we?"

Ah yes, of course no one could possibly not want to engage someone who's got a victim mentality and is liable to slander them after a race right? And if they do, it's only because they're horrible sexists. In fact any criticism of a woman is automatically sexist right?

And I said the most experienced and accomplished. No doubt she's good with a couple of group ones to her name but I dont think even Michelle would claim to be the very best. If a Damien Oliver or Glen Boss was available, which way would an objective person lean? Owners are always looking to engage the very best, particularly for the biggest races. And in this case, Michelle was one of them.

Henry:

05 Nov 2015 3:03:48pm

Oh we're so supporting of you Michelle - even though you're making up unflattering rubbish about us wanting to kick you off. You're making us look like sexist bigots, yet we're so supportive. Yeah, right!!

If Michelle is overreacting or lying (which I doubt) wouldn't they just say "well, we support Michelle but must point out (emphatically but nicely) that at no time did any of us oppose putting her on that horse" Are they saying that? The truth will set you and everyone free. So why not just say it?

Freddie Frog:

05 Nov 2015 3:25:47pm

No,They've now got millions in the bank, I'm sure they'll let it slide. Who wants to publically claim the media darling is lying? What would it achieve for you other than to cause further trouble. Why would anyone want to get involved in a public stoush for zero benefit?

But it would probably put other trainers, owners and industry members offside. Check out the comments from Glen Boss today.

I'd suggest the most likely situation is that some of the owners did want to put another jockey on at some stage (it's almost universal amongst owners) but they did so because they thought they could get someone better, not simply because she's a woman. It's hardly surprising that a jockey (who have notoriously large egos) would want to claim it's for some other reason than their own skills. Objective introspection is not often a strong suit.

Freddie Frog:

lorr rogers:

05 Nov 2015 4:22:07pm

Michele rode a well planned strategic race and won ahead of all others on a horse that was given little chance to win.Now that is a brilliant ride!She has done it!She has shown that she is a true champion.She has worked with the horse and he gave her his best because he was willing to. You cannot make a horse give his best unless you are with him and he accepts your commands and leadership.Michele deserves all praise and congratulations for her history making ride ... the best of everything ... she has broken through the gender barrier and made the racing game one that can now be played with equality. Let this be!

John51:

04 Nov 2015 1:15:53pm

What a lot of sexist rot. She won on the back of a horse given odds of a 100 to 1, yet she won. She has been given the ride by the owner and trainer on all bar one of the horses races and you can't get any horse off the paddock into the Melbourne Cup anyway.

It is a sad thing when we have such a good feel story of the first female Jocky winning against the odds as given by the bookies and yet some people feel they have to be nasty about it.

Freddie Frog:

04 Nov 2015 2:32:11pm

John51,That's because people who know anything about racing know that it's not the feel good story it's made out to be. Sure, they had a decent enough horse to make the cup field but they also had a monstrous dose of luck and circumstance that conspired to allow them to win.

Good Grief:

04 Nov 2015 3:03:11pm

Sorry you feel that way John, but I personally don't see horse racing as legitimate sport (or at least a human sport). A tiny hairless biped riding atop a fast creature doesn't make that humanoid an athlete, no matter how dapper they look on top of a beast. They are more akin to being a coach for a boxer, or a pit crew to a F1 racer; they help inch the real athlete to win, they are essential for success, but they aren't the stars running the show.

So what if the bookies put the odds at 100 to 1? Are they suddenly the undisputed professors on horse locomotion? I'd like to see their PHD. No, they are just a bunch of career gamblers and gambling advisers.

Also, I am sorry your capacity to interpret my lack of respect for jockeys in general as an attack on a specific gender, even when I was quick to recognize the accomplishments of female horses across racing history.

Eric Quang:

Good Grief:

04 Nov 2015 3:54:20pm

So could Saudi Kings and their philandering princes, tin pot dictators, mob bosses, former CEO's who got the golden parachute after destroying their companies, drug kingpins, and corrupt bank executives, Eric.

I don't suppose any of these fine individuals deserve your respect, do they? Maybe I am just jaded and can't be bought over by someone's fat bank account.

billyBoB:

"Ah... how the left narrative changes" I had to stop reading there, as I fell off my high horse shapped chair in a fit of laughter,The mythical (and singular ) narrative ot the dreaded 'LEFT'

'If anyone one should be interviewed, it should be the horse', you see if you had started with this line instead,your post would much less likely to be interpreted as an attack on a specific GenderGiven that out of the previous 154 horses that won the race, none were interviewedyou can see how trying to make this point the first time a female jockey won,and after immediately preceeding it with a comment about womens progress

the only logical inference is to take your post as an attack on the left,and against womens progress

Good Grief:

04 Nov 2015 4:48:36pm

billyBoB, I will take your sincere critical analysis of my comments into consideration.

As for the existence of the "left" is just as mythical as "conservatism". They are all labels on actions and frame of mind of individuals projected on society. The definition, of what constitutes as "left" or right", evolves and changes over time.

However, there is always a consistent element of "left" and "right" affiliations across history. The "right" is often associated with notions of maintaining the status quo, a stable hierarchy and unchanging form of governance. The "left" is often associated with agents of change, be it changes for the better like the Renaissance, or bad, like Pol Pot's communist revolution.

Example: Russia's ridding of its Tsar for the communist revolution is considered left leaning for it's unconventional ends. However, once communism took over Russia and Stalin managed to get a stable heirarchy of stooges in his government, it became the status quo, and thus, became right leaning.

So yes, there is a LEFT, and it encompasses a myriad of people and their agendas that do not wish to be grouped with one another. To be left, you simply have to be a challenge against the conventional and status quo.

Good Grief:

Will the horse run on its own? Will a car run on its own?A working horse runs on its own. A working car should not.

What is the complexity and variation between different horse race tracks (i.e. an oval)? What is the complexity and variation between various F1 race tracks? A horse race track is always an oval of standard size. F1 race tracks vary from track to track usually testing the driver's driving capacity to balance speed, maneuverability and reflex.

How long does a horse race last for? How long does an F1 race last for? A jockey only has to ride a horse for less than a minute. A F1 racer has to maintain concentration for many hours, testing their endurance.

When betting in a horse race, do you bet on the horse or the rider? On an F1 race, do you bet on the rider or the car?Well... you know the answer to this one.

Tom1:

GG. Having ridden the odd horse I will do my best to answer. A horse will run, only when the jockey dictates, unless it gets the bit in its teeth, so the jockey needs some control there.

Although race tracks are generally the same shape, they can be fast, slow or dead, and the jockey has to made decisions as to the horses ability to run on them. He/she also has to know when to move forward reign back, take advantage of openings, whether an opening is too soon, avoid being hemmed in on the rail, or being forced too wide etc etc.

The Melbourne cup is two minutes, and even one mistake on the part of the jockey can mean the end of the race. F1 drivers get relieved, where they can have a drink of coffee ore other stimulant.

If Darby Munro, and Joe Bloggs were the riders of two horses of equal ability, who would you back?

Nicole:

05 Nov 2015 6:00:00am

Anyone who thinks the jockey does nothing but sit and enjoy the ride obviously knows nothing about horses, riding, or racing. Don't get me wrong, I don't like horse racing, but to deny that it requires skill would be false criticism. The jockey must decide when to reel in, encourage, steady, or push a horse; they must decide which openings and positions to take, and tell the horse to take them; and they must position themselves so that their weight is as much out of the saddle as is possible (no easy feat, believe me, this takes a great deal of physical strength).

The fact that mares have been racing is actually a point toward the side of the sport being chauvinistic. We obviously recognize that there is no difference in the racing ability of a male or female horse, yet we still struggle to recognize this equality in people. There is still outright sexism, and many who think that women should not or cannot be jockeys (due to lack of necessary physical prowess and a fear that they will "feminize/soften" the sport, among other things).

Glenn Wilson:

drdig:

05 Nov 2015 9:55:57am

Nicole, you also don't know much about horse racing if you think mares and stallions/geldings are equal in abilities. Mares get weight relief from their male counterparts precisely because of this. This is what makes feats like those of Makybe and Winx all the more special. When a mare gives weight to males and beats them that is an exceptional feat, not a normal one.

It is the same in any sport that has physical strength or speed with as a determinant of performance. Males are stronger and faster than females. That is not a sexist or any PC term driven statement. It is a biologically driven fact.

Sue:

ibast:

04 Nov 2015 12:03:00pm

Well, that's just not true. Only one horse faltered and 2nd, 3rd and 4th placed horses were all shortish odds horses. In fact 4th place was the second favourite. Prince of Penzance beat them fair and square.

Just because the favourite didn't win, doesn't mean the winner didn't deserve the win.

Freddie Frog:

04 Nov 2015 12:25:55pm

The race itself was a horrible affair if the aim is to have the best handicapped horse win the race and each horse to have its chance.

The track was showing horrible inside bias, so much so that they released different track ratings for different parts of the track. Any horse trying to race out wider was significantly disadvantaged in the worse going and the slow overall tempo of the race added to that disadvantage.

The fact that horses out of barriers 1,2 and 4 ran the trifecta should tell you something. Race that race on a true surface and POP doesn't win. Sure that's the luck factor coming into play, its just a bit rich to turn it into a story of "battlers" beating the big names.

lazarus:

04 Nov 2015 3:10:13pm

So why did she have to come 4 wide from under the horses in front to win if the inside was such a great advantage. Surely they should have had the better running and skipped away from everybody if your logic is to be believed. Max Dynamite was trapped against the fence and his jockey had to force his way out to get a run as well.

Freddie Frog:

04 Nov 2015 5:24:18pm

Because the fast lane was not just the inside rail but the approximately 10 metres alongside it as anyone who following the races would know as announced by the stewards in the morning. Enough for a few horses across but not a lot more, particularly when there's 24 in the race at Flemington.

But you'd know that if you followed the races, perhaps you should give up before you out your ignorance further?

Fred:

04 Nov 2015 5:54:30pm

It is well documented that the inside was faster. The inside was rated fast, the rest of the track soft. Those were the official ratings. The winner had to hook out for clear air at the end, but it travelled 2900 metres out of 3200 on the fence, as did Max Dynamite. The horses in front can't skip away and win if they don't stay the trip or aren't good enough.

lazarus:

05 Nov 2015 10:15:48am

You mob were complaining the inside was the best running, now it was the inside 10 metres which meant that there was plenty of room for at least 4 or 5 abreast riding if you wanted to be on the best part of the track which is where the majority of the horses were.

As Fred said, the horses in front obviously weren't as good as Prince of Penzance so there is no use trying to argue that someone had an undue advantage, it seems most horses took advantage of the inside 10 metres.

Freddie Frog:

05 Nov 2015 1:26:57pm

Please give up, you have no idea what you're talking about.

The track manager and stewards admitted they stuffed up by allowing horses to run on the course proper last week and they shouldn't have aerated the centre of the track. The rain on Friday night/ Saturday morning compounded the error by turning the middle of the track into a bog.

Trying to suggest the bias didn't exist is to ignore reality and out an ignorance of racing. The only thing going for them is that at least it wasn't as bad as Derby day where the inside rail was a complete escalator (they moved the rail out 2m for Cup day).

Albo:

05 Nov 2015 10:53:09am

"The winner had to hook out for clear air at the end, but it travelled 2900 metres out of 3200 on the fence, as did Max Dynamite."

Spot on Fred !In fact the three placegetters positioned 3, 4 & 5 back on the rails for the majority of the race. Each had cosy runs in the best going and peeled out in the straight to fill the placings. Michelle Payne who had been 5 back on the rail all race to that point, made the one key decision to get off the rail coming to the turn to follow Trip to Paris, and the gap opened up at the top of the straight for a clear run to the line. Max Dynamite & Criterion (both carrying more weight than Prince of Penzance)took longer to get clear to cash in on their cosy runs they had. Michelle had one decision to make throughout the race, when to get off the rail to get into the clear, and her judgement was perfect as it turned out !

Lindsay Wilson:

05 Nov 2015 7:30:20am

Fred the handicapper's aim is to have all 24 runners dead heat for first, the bias in the track was known to all before race 1.Weir's instructions carried out to the letter were to try and tail Paris and Criterion and when they were either pocketed or running out of puff Michelle pulled out and drove to the line with full head of steam in a perfectly timed tactical ride. Other jockeys may have foolishly followed the Jap horse or decided they could defy the track bias? Yes if the race was run over and over again POP may not have won again but they only run one Melb Cup per year and Michelle, Weir and POP brought their collective A-Game to Flemington and deservedly got the chocolates Of course there's an element of luck in the win but there's a hell of a lot of skill and smarts too. Also consider other jockeys rode in earlier races and had experienced the bias first hand coming into The Cup. The Cup was Michelle's only ride for the day and she played em on a break. Good on her!

John51:

04 Nov 2015 1:24:32pm

Sue, did a Bradbury! What rot. There was only one horse that did not finish the race out of twenty odd starters. Oh, and she led for at least the last one hundred to two hundred meters of the race. I would suggest to say what you did is to denigrate her ride and abilities as a Jocky and for what.

She didn't win any easy way. She certainly wasn't on a horse that was expected to win or for that matter even make a place. The trainer said he was just hopeing for a top ten finnish. In fact her horse was placed on odds of a 100 to 1 to, yet win she did. So I would suggest she deserves praise for her ride rather than all of this criticism from people here.

Fred:

04 Nov 2015 3:07:32pm

In what sense did she "do a Bradbury"?

Have you ever seen the footage of what Bradbury did? He sat last in a race and was the only one to finish it when the others fell over. Michelle Payne sat in the middle of the field, on the fence, tracked a good horse out of the ruck, steered around it and drew away with a well-timed run. The 2 situations could not be more different.

drdig:

05 Nov 2015 10:02:49am

Fred, and others, a Bradbury is a good analogy. Analogies are not meant to be parallels. As the saying goes, they had Bradbury's luck. It doesn't need to mean that everyone else fell over. It was about the luck involved in how everything panned out. The best horse didn't win the race, and often doesn't. That's racing. But this wasn't just not the best horse, it is not even in the top 10 who were in the race.

Whitey:

04 Nov 2015 9:58:32pm

Sue, she didn't do a Bradbury. Female jockeys don't have to waste like their male cousins. We no longer have a generation of undernourished kids to make into jockeys. Not so many 45 kg male riders around. In some country meetings the girls ride the card. Probably the way of the future, she's a good hoop and well done her.

drdig:

Dove:

04 Nov 2015 11:58:01am

Does that mean you're advocating the bantam weights compete against the heavy weights? In most sports men are woman compete separately because of physical differences. But in horse racing, sailing and I see no reason why not shooting, they can compete side by side. There are no doubt plenty of other sports where they do

Zing:

"In most sports men are woman compete separately because of physical differences."

Let's imagine that we have a female athlete who is as tall, muscled and skilled as the male champion in the same sport.

That woman would be permitted to compete against the female competitors and wipe the floor with them. The male champion would have to compete against other men, who on average will be taller and stronger. And not because of any difference in height, muscle or skill. Just because of their respective plumbing.

Zing:

"The male already 'wiped the floor' with all the other male competitors, otherwise he wouldn't be the Champion."

And he should have the opportunity to wipe the floor with the female competitors too and thus be the champion over them as well.

But he isn't. Woman are cloistered off so they don't need to compete against male athletes. It isn't because of the height or muscle of the specific athletes in question - it is simply because of their gender. And there lies the unfairness.

lazarus:

Freddie Frog:

04 Nov 2015 12:18:50pm

Dove,There are very few sports that are split by weight divisions and they are usually pure strength or power sports.

I'm advocating the logical progression of the thought that if champion athletes are equal, surely they should compete against each other rather than in such arbitrarily restricted competitions. That way, there can be no complaints about inequality.

Although it's also ironic that in this instance we are talking about a race that is set on handicap conditions.

Dove:

04 Nov 2015 5:12:21pm

FF, you are right but what of it? Contributors are being rather niggardly on this issue. If people can't find a positive thing to say about the first women to win a Cup then perhaps they should be commenting over on the article on disability pensions where they can rail all they like against the lame, the unsound and the lazy. Leave this one for praise for a young women enjoying her moment in the sun

Freddie Frog:

04 Nov 2015 7:02:04pm

Dove,If the story was simply about a great performance by a jockey and horse I'd probably not care.

But it's being used to push some weird sort of argument about "gurrrlll power" and as an avid racing fan, this annoys me no end. In fact most of the commentary from once a year punters annoys me and it's even worse when it comes from people who spend most of the rest of the year calling for racing to be banned.

Dove:

04 Nov 2015 10:45:35pm

FF, I'd have thought that we get this amount of adulation on every cup winner. The media loves the boy form the bush, the rider overcoming adversity, the rags to riches and now they can wallow in the female bit. I've no issue with people pretending she's a Pankhurst or a St Joan. It's nice to see a barrier smashed and in a few weeks the glossy mags will be over her and we can all get back to the next celebrity de jure

mike j:

I do get the irony of disdain for 'verbal argy bargy' in a wall of uninspired ad hominem. Unfortunately, this is one of those cases where unintended irony amounts to nothing more than self-defeating hypocrisy.

Dove:

04 Nov 2015 3:56:43pm

Not fast and loose but timely generosity.

Women jockeys seem to be enjoying some success. Women racing car drivers, also. Women coxs in men's eights rowing. You've probably never heard of her, but there was this tennis player named Billy Jean King. She was challenged by the retired number tennis player, Bobby Riggs who thought that even a man in his 50s could beat a woman. She won in straight sets.

mike j:

04 Nov 2015 5:14:30pm

"She won in straight sets."

Against a has-been 26 years her senior. Should I stand up to clap, or is a sitting ovation enough?

What you conveniently omit in your desperation to find a 42 year-old example of girl power is that Riggs, just four months earlier, had won the INITIAL 'battle of the sexes' against Margaret Court, the world's #1 female, 6-2, 6-1.

Freddie Frog:

04 Nov 2015 5:29:58pm

Dove,I'm unsure what the world's best female tennis player at her prime, beating a 55 year old man has to do with anything?But since you mention it, I'm assuming you've also seen the story where Karsten Braasch (ranked 200) beat both the Williams sisters in two one set matches on the same day. Scores were 6-1 and 6-2 respectively?

Dove:

05 Nov 2015 7:02:50am

FF- I've no idea what to make of it either. Riggs had been trash talking women's tennis for years, threw down the challenge himself, put a lot of his own money into a Rockeyesque spectacle and even wagered considerable sums of money on his own victory. Then lost on live TV. Buffoonery repays itself.

This is a minor, although hilarious footnote in events where men and women have competed against one another. More consistent and contemporary examples might include motor racing. Or the nags.

Most interesting are the posts on this article where people with deep issues project them into boys versus girls and my Dad is better than your Dad. I'm struck at how deep the wounds of the family law court can go

Freddie Frog:

05 Nov 2015 8:27:31am

Dove,Yes he was clearly struck with his own importance and own view of his skills.

And he got shown that the variance in skills throughout the sexes is large and overlapping. People who judge others based on their gender rather than their individual skills will often end up with egg on their faces.

Dove:

05 Nov 2015 9:04:15am

FF, I'd like to see more integrated sports. Someone told me Olympic sailing is- reckon I can't be bothered looking that up. Surely shooting and archery could all be mixed in, along with curling, maybe diving (?), are there men's synchronised swimmers? (no jokes, please), badminton, table tennis, lawn bowls, billiards, there seems to be plenty of sports- if you want to call them that- which would still work under mixed competition. Maybe it's a marketing thing? Or it would preclude the Iranians from playing :)

Freddie Frog:

05 Nov 2015 10:31:04am

In a lot of sports the split is clearly about the money. You can double the amount of matches and sponsorship if you have men's and women's competitions in the "right" sports if they're marketed correctly.

Fred:

04 Nov 2015 5:50:22pm

Yeah, against a fat, bespectacled 55 year old man who had not even been a power player in his heyday. Fancy a top professional player dropping 10 games across three sets to such an opponent. The part that always gets left out of the story is that Riggs played Margaret Court - the number 1 ranked female player in the world - before he played King, and thrashed her.

And what about Kaarsten Brasch? He was a journeyman player, barely in the top 200. The Williams sisters challenged him, and he blew them off the court, beating them in succession after an afternoon on the golf course, with a couple of beers under his belt.

Dove:

05 Nov 2015 8:15:01am

I don't follow tennis myself but one minute on Google revealed they were teenage girls at the time. Yay for whatshisname. Next time he could challenge the under tens to a boxing match. But I'd reckon if they played today that Serena would have the wood on him

AJ:

04 Nov 2015 11:19:52am

The overwhelming majority of women have absolutely no interest in horse racing. Except for the Melbourne cup, and only then so they can tart them selves up and get as drunk as Kath and Kim ( check out some of the social Media post )One win dose not a even playing field make.

LK:

04 Nov 2015 4:56:38pm

A lot of women have an interest in horse racing - and not just to "tart themselves up." We aren't all painted airheads, you know!!

Obviously Michelle Payne has a very strong interest in Horse Racing. It's her profession. And it has not been easy for her or any female jockey to compete in a male dominated field. That is why we should celebrate her win. To those who believed a woman couldn't win the Melbourne Cup, she said a resounding "Get Stuffed!!" Good on her I say and to all, with persistence and hard work, who defy the odds. It's incredible how many commenters on these forums seem really threatened by the idea that a woman broke through the male dominated barrier. There is a lot of fear behind their comments and a desperate need to try to belittle her achievement. Very sad indeed.

LK:

04 Nov 2015 6:03:26pm

Do you mean misandrists mikej - those who hate men?

You dont have to be a misandrist to cheer when a woman defies the odds and becomes a winner, whilst beating men in the process. Just like cheering for the under dog Wallabies doesnt make me hate New Zealanders. I love to see battlers defy the odds. Its Inspiring, no matter who it is.Doesnt make us manhaters. Plenty of men were happy for Michelle too.

mike j:

04 Nov 2015 8:50:09pm

I don't, but misogynist seems to mean whatever you want it to these days, so I understand your confusion.

This perception of yours that women are 'underdogs' and have to 'beat the odds'... you don't think women are equal? You cheer for the Wallabies over the All Blacks, but do you cheer for heads over tails? Red over black?

The expectation that men will beat women most of the time, even in a physical equaliser like horse racing, seems to stem from a perception of female inferiority which would surely come under the 'misogyny' umbrella, don't you think?

AJ:

05 Nov 2015 10:15:18am

Henry She didn't win the horse did. I don't recall anyone saying a woman couldn't win, they participate and win on a regular basis the fact is everyone thought the horse couldn't win that's why it was a 100/1 shot.

Henry:

AJ - If you think a jockey pays no part in a horse winning a race, then you don't know what you're talking about. And the fact that she rode a 100-1 shot horse to victory is even more of a victory.

If you can't see (or refuse to see) Michelle's achievement for what it is, then I feel sorry for you.

On the other hand, its actually kind of encouraging to see so many trying to play down her achievement. It means women are making inroads and it's making the reactionaries scared. Changing the status quo always ruffles the feathers of that group.

AJ:

04 Nov 2015 6:25:17pm

Michelle Payne won on her merits and good on her. that said I'm sure all previous male winners also had their knockers and doubters who could "get stuffed" but if they lost they didn't blame it on gender.

Henry:

05 Nov 2015 8:39:10am

No doubt they did AJ. But in this instance, it was believed that a woman was not capable of winning the Melbourne Cup. How many women over the years were never given the chance to run because people thought they didn't have it in them to win it?

The great thing is, another prejudiced viewpoint was been proven wrong. Now maybe more women will be given the chance to ride in the Cup. The belief that women can't do the job has well and truly been proven false.

Henry:

04 Nov 2015 5:27:15pm

AJ there are a lot of successful women jockeys, trainers (eg Gai Waterhouse), racing media personalities(Emma Freedman), strappers, vets etc all over the world - not to mention the many women who take a real interest and are active in the sport. Your comment is like a stereotypically 50s attitude. It may surprise you but many women have interests other than clothes and makeup. And Michelles win is another important indicator of what women can achieve. Sorry if that leaves some men feeling left behind and anxious.

AJ:

Ed:

05 Nov 2015 6:38:08am

AJ, Gai Waterhouse and Emma Freedman are two examples of high profile women in Australia. There are also countless others who work in the industry.. You also forget the many women who just love horses and horse racing - have done since they were small girls and follow it. Then of course there are female gamblers who bet on the horses regularly.To say women arent Interested in racing is rubbish.

As for the idea that women only get interested in racing once a year, you could argue that many men are the same. They only watch and bet on one race a year - so what's your point?

AJ:

Ed:

05 Nov 2015 11:19:51am

And the greater majority of men only get interested in racing on one day of the year - so again, what's your point?

I would say the greater majority of Australians don't care about Rugby until we play in a RWC final. Or about golf, or cycling or the myriad of other sports going around. So what are we trying to prove by this reasoning?

The Lone Ranger:

Albo:

04 Nov 2015 1:46:29pm

Yep ! Total coincidence !They are the all male owners' chosen and registered racing colours, that group of owners half of whom preferred another jockey other than Michelle to ride their horse in the Cup !Michelle owes much of her success in recent years to the champion bloke and great horse trainer Darren Weir, who remains loyal and fights hard with his owners to keep Michelle on their mounts in big races ! He appreciates the abilities of Michelle Payne in getting the best out of certain horses, just as Leon Macdonald has for years done with great jockey Clare Lindop in Adelaide. These types of trainer / jockey partnerships are key to the promotion of female jockey opportunities at the highest levels.

Veronica:

04 Nov 2015 3:14:46pm

The owner selects racing colours, not the jockey. And they are not "feminist" colours. You may be confusing them with the colours of the suffragette movement in the the early 20th century. Green, white and violet to spell GWV ("Give Women the Vote").

Karen:

04 Nov 2015 12:33:26pm

I rode trackwork 20 years ago and it was suggested I was so good I should apply to be a jockey. I did some research and decided that as a female who frequently heard comments from trainers "women aren't strong enough" despite there being more female track riders than male even then, was ridiculous. I realised I would never be put on a decent horse and thus be one of the 7 Victorian female jockeys ( who had to change in the public toilets) who never did very well. I did have my little victories when I got horse going well enough for a male to ride and watch them struggle with it. The best was the mare who had trouble getting into the barriers for a trail, the trainer put a male on the week later to "show me how it's done" and the rider fell off! The whole thing these people miss with their "not strong enough" opinion is that no-one is strong enough to make a 500-700kg of flesh and bones with it's own brain do anything!. Horse control has very little to do with strength, and anyone who thinks that doesn't know horses.

nonjudgemental:

04 Nov 2015 1:05:36pm

well said Karen :) I completely know where you are coming from having been there done that only I did not have any interest in actually being a jockey I looked at the male jockeys I had to work with .... and the less said the better!!! I would also like to put out to AJ I am not sure where he pulled his stats on 'The overwhelming majority of women have absolutely no interest in horse racing. Except for the Melbourne cup, and only then so they can tart them selves up and get as drunk as Kath and Kim ( check out some of the social Media post )' not sure if he is taking the p*** but very broad statement I would hazard a guess that if stats were taken by the industry there would be as many if not more women working behind the scenes in the racing industry as men and also allowing men to take the limelight ... more male trainers than women ... that's because men can dribble shite better than women ... think used car salesmen and you have your horse trainer!

whogoesthere:

04 Nov 2015 2:19:11pm

No, it sounds like atypical case of blanket stereotyping, a common affliction most people suffer from. You know like, women aren't smart enough to be doctors, or a man can't be as good a parent as a woman, or Asians are bad drivers, or white people are racists, or poor people are lazy, or irch people are selfish so and so's.

mike j:

But your post does struggle for relevance. To whose stereotypes do you refer?

It seems to be women claiming they are discriminated against because they are 'not strong enough', yet the OP disputes that anyone who knows horses would say such a thing. So whence does it come?

I hope you're not accusing me of bigotry for daring to question a clear inconsistency in the narrative. My last sentence was a generalisation (as opposed to a stereotype) which you only reinforce by deliberately avoiding my point.

Freddie Frog:

Ed:

05 Nov 2015 11:26:11am

Women aren't inferior Freddie, just still disadvantaged in so many ways. Much has been achieved for women over the years but the fight for equality and respect continues. Sexism, like racism in Australia refuses to disappear without a fight.

mike j:

Veronica:

04 Nov 2015 3:18:52pm

If you think back to the late 70s, Reg Ansett refused to employ female pilots because they were supposedly not strong enough. This was despite the fact there was no strength test for male pilots. At least Michelle Payne didn't have to do a Deborah Lawrie and take racing to court to get a ride.

mike j:

04 Nov 2015 4:19:05pm

Unsurprisingly, I find it difficult to think back to a time before I was born.

More to the point, I find it worrying that I'm, at best, expected to consider such a time as relevant to my life today and, at worst, expected to take personal responsibility for the actions of the fathers of the women who keep reminding me about it.

ephemeral:

05 Nov 2015 10:21:24am

Ahhh youths preoccupation with today, perhaps that is why you seem to miss the obvious point that the 70's were the formative period for a significant proportion of people in positions of power today. The prevailing attitudes of that period are still influencing society today, this is where the relevance comes from, understanding the social construct you currently exist in. Generational change of social norms takes time.

mike j:

05 Nov 2015 4:32:12pm

Ahhh, old fogies' preoccupation with the good old days. Times have changed, ephemeral. Laws and social programs have been implemented to counter historical biases against women, while the biases against men remain and are ignored even by those claiming to champion 'equality'.

Entire generations have been raised in a culture of gender equality and, more recently, female advantage. If you want to put a case for pervasive female disadvantage, you're going to have to come up with something a bit better than non-specific whining about 'prevailing attitudes'.

Optimist:

04 Nov 2015 10:26:58pm

'any tiny achievement by any women as a victory in the war against men.'The war against men? I know what you mean. That war where two men are killed by women partners each week. The war that drives threatened men to shelters. It's just not fair that men suffer so much. They earn less and only have half as much superannuation. Hardly any male CEOs. The list goes on.

mike j:

05 Nov 2015 4:09:11pm

The war in which narcissistic, self-absorbed women lie about how many other women get killed by DV every week, seemingly to boost their own victim credentials by proxy.

The war in which those same women astonishingly ignore the other side of the exact same coin: the incidence of men and children being murdered by women in DV incidents, and the fact that they don't actually have any shelters to go to because women absorb all the resources directed at the issue.

The war in which women complain about how unfair it is that men earn more money for doing more work at a higher level, or work that is harder and more dangerous. The war in which women think they should get CEO positions based on what's between their legs rather than on merit or effort.

If the list goes on, Optimist, keep reading it. I'm happy for you to embarrass yourself all day if that's your bag.

muttley58:

05 Nov 2015 8:35:58am

You cannot be serious..Women are just starting to come into their own in sports and get the recognition that males have enjoyed since Adam was playing full back for Eden.It is to our credit that we are accepting that women can compete with men in a lot of sports and it is way past time that they get the same exposure in the media.The only reason that women's sport is so unevenly represented is that all advertising and 'gurus' make comment like 'they wouldn't do so well against men.I say congratulations to Michelle Payne for a great ride on a horse not rated, and a big cheer for her brother who didn't lose faith. NOTHING to do with her gender, just a great sporting achievement.CheersMuttley

From the Fortress:

04 Nov 2015 12:50:34pm

Michelle won because she rode a good race, on a good horse. There were other good horses, with good riders, but in that race, she was better. And that's when it counts.And to call the Jockey on the back of a throughbred at full gallop as nothing but the weight on the top shows a massive ignorance of both horses and of riding in general.Clancy of the Overflow didn't need to know anything about horses, they can muster cattle by themselves.

Christine:

04 Nov 2015 1:57:31pm

From the fortress, what you said sounds the closest to the truth. For example, I don't even know how to ride a horse, let alone get one to team up with me in a race. Truth is truth, horses are good workers and they are very trainable as they have an affinity with humans more so than other animals with the exception of dogs and cats. Treat them well, do not abuse them, they might just do anything for you. Is that the type of trusting nature one should in their right brain abuse? I think not. It wouldn't be wise to. Cheers

From the Fortress:

04 Nov 2015 4:13:46pm

Michelle has amassed a total of over 24 million dollars in prize money.In the last two weeks of October, that's not counting the Melbourne Cup, she rode three winners and six places, including 2nd in the Moonee Valley Cup on POP.

You don't ride or know anything about horses, and apparently nothing about racing as well.

Fred:

04 Nov 2015 8:00:12pm

Michelle Payne has been a professional jockey for 15 years. She has ridden hundreds and hundreds of winners, including in group one races. If you've never heard of her until yesterday, that's a deficiency of yours, not hers.

it's about time :

04 Nov 2015 12:55:32pm

If the political class could just stop for a moment using Australian cultural values for their own personal aggrandizement and if the political and social commenting elite could just stop for a moment dissecting and unpacking they might realize something.

Most of us love an Aussie battler. It's in our DNA. Nowhere have I seen battler defined by gender. As a not particularly feminist leaning male I was as pleased as punch to see Michelle Payne win yesterday even if I didn't back the horse she was on.

Maybe it's time for less morbid, self-analysis and more appreciation of what a unique culture we have here in this great country. It's the envy of the world.

Maharet:

04 Nov 2015 1:14:45pm

This really is getting silly. Firstly, an unreserved congratulations on her winning ride. She won me a few hundred.

BUT, the media carry on is over the top. There are other female jockeys, they have won many races. Why is this girl the champion of women's sporting abilities? Just because she won the Melbourne Cup? There are no degrees of difficulties in racing, one race is no harder than the other.

Here is the real [non] story - There is absolutely no advantage to being male in any form of Equestrianism, including racing. Women have been winning at the highest levels in all horse sports for over a century. Ever since women were accepted astride a horse as opposed to sidesaddle.

Trying to make something out of nothing can only serve to discredit you in the end. Jockeys are selected and therefore, paid according to their form - not their gender.

Mena Reno:

05 Nov 2015 7:59:50am

This article was never going to end up any other way. It was a silly idea, with a silly premise and a silly title. Payne's achievement has nothing to do with it - that was always going to be taken away from her by Team Woman. Didn't uou know that individual women are not allowed to succeed on their own? It seems that everything an exceptional woman accomplishes must be taken for the team. It's not men keeping these women down, it's other women - women who want for free what Payne worked hard for and earned. This is what the feminine version of 'equality' is really about.

Breach of peace:

04 Nov 2015 1:21:12pm

It is most unfortunate that you worded the first paragraph with the "because she was the wrong sex." It is different sex not the wrong sex.

Historically Michelle Payne more than likely had do endure a number of hardships and discrimination issues from the domination of the males. Nonetheless those in her camp have proved she has what it takes and the whole team need to be congratulated on the win for a start which is the prominent horse race in Australia. Secondly she just happens to be the right jockey in time and place historically as a female jockey and deserves all the accolades of a champion. I hope we hear more from her and the team in the future. Congratulations as it was well earned despite the odds!

Christine:

04 Nov 2015 1:27:43pm

I'd be interested to find out how one can whip the horse without hurting them. If at all possible, it must be a real art which requires extreme skill. Time will tell whether that was exactly what the first female Melbourne cup winner did. I hope for the horse sake that is the exact art she miraculised. It will be no whip for people who can't perform miracles. I think that's only fair.

From the Fortress:

04 Nov 2015 3:04:59pm

Christine, you'll get a lot of opinions on this. some say the whip hurts and others will say the horse barely notices as they are so excited by being in the race that they barely notice.Until we can get hold of Mr. Ed to translate for us, we can only guess.I think that if a powerful 700kg animal whose basic instinct is to run doesn't want a human being on their back, then it won't happen.Humans have always revered and respected the horse and horses, seemingly, have repaid in kind.

From 'The Man From Snowy River'But his hardy mountain pony could scarcely raise a trot, He was blood from hip to shoulder from the spur;But his pluck was still undaunted, and his courage fiery hot, for never yet was mountain hourse a cur.

Kind of implying that the little fella would do it over again if necessary.

stephen jones:

04 Nov 2015 1:54:01pm

Michelle won the race because she is a good jockey and after 23 starts on this horse, she knew it well.The pace was slow as 2 days prior, the track was declared 'slow' by officials as it rained the previous 4 days.

She got barrier 1 by the good luck of her brother who picked the 'hat' ; all good riders attempt to get close the rails at the 70 metre mark.'Feminist colours' ?I should think that skin tones would qualify ... all buttered up and ready for bed.

Terry:

SteveAtThePubXXXX:

05 Nov 2015 1:34:46pm

"The pace was slow because the horse travelling at the front was going slowly. The inside part of the track, where it was travelling, as rated good by the stewards."The other 23 jockeys OK for losing riders.I bet if Payne slowed to a halt the rest of the field would have done the same further back.What a look that would have been.Why, someone even shot at a racing official this week, just gone.Serendipitous? or such is racing?

raymond:

notathome:

04 Nov 2015 7:09:31pm

Of course they can't. Isn't it strange how when 3rd wave feminists draw lines for a battleground one appears?

Meanwhile the article on one of the world's greatest athletes, who happens to be female and who earned her place through decades of hard work instead of complaining about glass ceilings, the "patriarchy" or making demands for equality, was written by a male not one of the staff "feminists".

She's a highly respected and admired athlete because she doesn't make that minor detail, her gender, the biggest part of her story.

Albo:

05 Nov 2015 11:55:17am

"She's a highly respected and admired athlete because she doesn't make that minor detail, her gender, the biggest part of her story."

I am a great Michelle Payne racing follower, and I would have no issue in engaging her to ride my Melbourne Cup horse or Cox Plate horse ( if I had one) although, I might ask Clare Lindop first. But you surely cannot say " she doesn't make that minor detail, her gender, the biggest part of her story.", as accidentally or intentionally , that is exactly what she did to "her story" after the race on Tuesday.

Eric Quang:

04 Nov 2015 2:35:23pm

women in sport are doing well including the Australian women's soccer team who made splendid progress at the world cup, achieving far more than their male counter parts despite the fact they did it on a shoe string budget. Unfortunately the good work of the women soccer players was spoilt by soccer's administrators who allowed the pay dispute to spiral out of control to the extent that the players tour of the US was cancelled, losing the oppotunity to gain media coverage and quality sponsors, what a disaster indeed. More women sports administrators are needed to replace the drones so that women's sport can reach it's full potential.

mike j:

"achieving far more than their male counter parts despite the fact they did it on a shoe string budget"

Playing against other non-competitive teams from a comparatively minuscule talent pool which were also on a shoestring budget.

Achieving more? Please. My second grade team won the local championship recently, so did we 'achieve more' than the Matildas? We won the entire competition while the Matildas didn't even make the semis.

Makendra:

04 Nov 2015 3:04:12pm

Oh I know what it is, it's the silks. You know it wouldn't surprise me if there's a heap of lawyers and the like doing their own horsey races in the Melbourne Cup. And through it all, unseeing, just living, rides this young woman, just like in National Velvet the movie when they show the newspaper and then the rest of the picture. You are right Miranda, it isn't the colours, it's some other significance. Perhaps some of the horses are averse to certain patterns or even they like them.

Geoff:

04 Nov 2015 3:28:10pm

This little lady's feat was truly amazing....but....all the pro-feminist types who wouldn't give her the time of day last week will be trying to attach their cause to her celebrity. Also: male jockeys have much greater upper body strength than females. The last thing trainers and owners want is a jockey who can't hold or control a strong willed mount. That's why women jockeys are passed over in many cases. Agree?

AJ:

Christine:

nonjudgemental:

04 Nov 2015 5:00:25pm

Geoff when I was involved in the racing industry both as a strapper / trackwork rider / stablehand etc etc I dealt with all the 'problem' ones barrier rogues, bolters, buckers, shiers nasties hyper they all ended up as my 'mounts' I def was not the 'strongest' rider being female and all that as you say but I was the best rider the best horseperson and my a**** stuck the best in the saddle Strapping a galloper can be harder than riding them and I have been given the task of strapping gallopers that have literally dragged male strappers around the mounting enclosure to the point the jockey has not been able to mount so not sure where you are coming from as it is not actually about strength when it comes to good horsemanship

anurse:

04 Nov 2015 5:52:18pm

Men ride as well as women, it is little to do with upper body strength, you need a good seat, good balance. And a feel for the horse, feel is tricky and not every rider achieves the magical oneness with the horse.Good jockeys also need to be able to read the race, know the track, know other riders, just for starters.It was a good ride, 100:1 winner points to a good job by the handicapper.It is a handicap race, not the Cox Plate. In theory any horse could win, it was good for racing that an outsider won the Cup. Also good for racing that a Payne was the winning jockey.

Albo:

05 Nov 2015 12:08:07pm

"Men ride as well as women, it is little to do with upper body strength, you need a good seat, good balance. And a feel for the horse, feel is tricky and not every rider achieves the magical oneness with the horse."

Spot on anurse !And there is no better balanced rider in racing than Michelle Payne. Watch any of her rides, she is one with her mount, motionless, steady till the sprint is on. That is why horses run for her, and good trainers recognise that, and engage her to ride their mounts at times, rather than opting for her stronger male counterparts.

.:

05 Nov 2015 1:42:26pm

If the handicap matters that much,as espoused by all and sundry,why not give the slowest horses the inside running and can the draw?Nothing in racing adds up,except the death and injury toll of the petrified horses.(often suppressed or closed down )

LK:

Alison Cann.:

04 Nov 2015 3:34:21pm

THIS Tracey is written brilliantly.It is brilliant.Maybe Tracey Holmes has also stepped out of the staid, backward style of writing and has broken the glass ceiling as well.Write from the shoulder, no frillies and wordiness for Tracey, it is just pure meaning about how she feels that a woman beat the men in writing. You did here what Michelle did in riding while Tracey was the write track in a rails run.

GP:

04 Nov 2015 4:05:09pm

good on her smashing another glass ceiling and levelling the playing field. Its not only good for sport but for women in all fields of life . There is discrimination against women in sports, business, politics and every other field you name. Exhibit 1 . Our former PM Abbott, the misogynist shock jocks and the tabloid media who are all trying to capitalise on her success now. For those blind who cannot see, she put it best " Get Stuffed"

Lostarrow:

Mel:

04 Nov 2015 4:16:03pm

Imagine for example if you were to train a horse to follow an X shape. What would it do? It would follow an X shape and if that X shape got out quickly enough from the starting cage then that horse would follow it. Well that is interesting, I know nothing of the psychology of horses, and unlike the racing dogs they don't appear to be trained to appear to run toward something they think will reward them. My question I suppose is, are these horses being trained to run, or are they being trained to run at or two something.

Mel:

Mel:

04 Nov 2015 4:24:15pm

In effect the spectators are not watching a race of horses, if the horses are not racing each other. They are watching a group of animals run from point one to point two with little awareness of the event. And they are watching a group of elite formula 1-type elite drivers. And from the look of the social frippery of the event, it is a Monied do with a bit of middle class in there because otherwise people would talk about it rather than about them. Does anyone recall Jean Shrimpton? Anyone? Was that her name, Jean Shrimpton?

Mel:

04 Nov 2015 4:27:56pm

There comes a time when "a race" no longer means what it did. What it used to mean and what it does mean, if you give it some thought they are not the same thing. I say, we are people of the Southern Hemisphere, there is no shame in having Easter in the second Tuesday in November, and then we have a perfectly lovely customized quasi-religious public holiday for the hats, and we can get the rubbish out of the ol' Melbourne cup, and it'll be lovely again. When one creates a stir, and others scramble to follow, it is never particularly lovely.

Mel:

04 Nov 2015 4:44:26pm

And what you're saying here is that in this horse race, a woman "won" the race FOR THE FIRST TIME? What d'ya mean there, was there a prize, or was the young lassie working for somebody. For goodness sakes, can we have just one sporting triumph that isn't this corporate, for the sake of the young people.

Mel:

04 Nov 2015 4:56:08pm

There is no shame in missing Easter Bonnets, there is no shame in missing Tony Abbott and all he stood for, there is no shame in just wanting to see everything as back to how it was, how it always was, how it should be, a benign leader, a benign government, and an aspirational girl and horse story. National Velvet, that was also a great time.

Mel (MD):

04 Nov 2015 5:06:56pm

You see, it's possible to see just how brutally oppressive the previous government was being, when people see "and yous can all get stuffed" as feminine empowerment. She didn't win it because she is a girl, stupids. She won it because she, her brother, the trainer and the horse poor bastard were really wanting it to happen. It really was a National Velvet moment, it really was. But go back and take a look again at that film, and see how you feel about it, remembering how Elizabeth Taylor really did fall off the horse, really did have a terrible injury throughout her life, remember that she was this gorgeous thing, but when the horse broke something they just shot it and got a new one.

Mel (MD):

Nathan:

04 Nov 2015 5:32:39pm

What a sporting legend. It should be noted that in 57 countries around the world this would not be possible due to hatred of women by a particular religion. In fact in those countries michelle would have been mutilated at birth, married off to pedophiles at 9-16, segregated, enslaved by physical markers upon pain of humiliation or worse and prevented from actually participating in this great sport. In fact there is over 1% of the nation prevented from achieving great things like michelle by a certain religion. Not to mention what they would have done to her brother at birth. What a great country, and what a role model to men and women. As well as her brother.

Christine :

05 Nov 2015 8:00:06am

Sorry yen, I don't know what horse you are talking about and when you went to measure their skin thickness. They look thin skinned to me. Really glossy and that. So tell us, what measurements did you get?

.:

05 Nov 2015 1:38:17pm

calling it 'particular religion' does not stop the fact you are a bigoted xenophobe inciting hatred you know.So brave.

There are even more countries who do not or cannot afford horse destruction by stealth as prolifically as the geedy and ignorant west does.They are closer to 'civilised and humane' than the cruelty advocates.

Mel (MD):

04 Nov 2015 5:37:11pm

So you see, if you see the government of Australia as the horse, and the Prime Minister of Australia as the young female central to the plot, and you see the concept of Monarchy as the actual race itself, you see this kind of sport as a kind of bout, a kind of duel, a kind of joust, and you happen to notice the rareness with which a woman is elevated in this Great Game, and notice particularly that there isn't really a good reason for that, is there some way in which a really tough woman would be any different to a really tough man and in that case why HAVEN'T there been any women jockeys win the cup, and what else did I mention there ah yes the psychology of vision and motivation in horses, crowds and crowd control, the legal profession, and, ah, the use of movies to affect electoral outcomes in pre-social-media times you know, when there really WAS no social media, I think THEN if you go back and read the actual opinion piece it really doesn't seem that much to be about Michelle Payne. Good job by the way, Michelle Payne. Really, really admirable. You know it.

Christine :

05 Nov 2015 8:03:47am

Yep. I am not convinced that the whipping doesn't hurt. I mean if they (the horse) can't feel it (the whip), then why do people keep doing it? Waste of time you must agree. I say the whip makers just want business for their industry so they falsely advertise by getting people to think it hurts (when in actual fact, they think it doesn't). Cheers

stephen jones:

Gregor:

04 Nov 2015 7:06:58pm

She wasn't supposed to win, she knew that. And yet she chose to continue. Selfish, I suppose. We'll likely learn of many such temptations to our young jockeys when the desire to excel simply overwhelms their understanding of, you know, things.

JockeysOnTheBrakes:

Sarah:

04 Nov 2015 5:46:57pm

I tend to agree with that. It's like those Adam Curtis documentaries about Britain, and how hypnotical they were even if one only listened with the picture turned away. David Attenborough, he sounded like David Attenborough, he was in a way anthropomorphising we, people.

Mel (MD):

04 Nov 2015 6:10:04pm

You should read all that in David Attenborough speak, although it isn't written that way so it should be a challenge. There is no 155 years that "we" have been waiting to be women amongst whom one has won the Melbourne Cup. There simply is not, nor is there a title that goes with that. Does she get to curtsey for someone?

foxlike:

04 Nov 2015 7:58:16pm

Good grief, what a outburst of anti-woman sentiment! Michelle, you are dead right, it's a chauvinist business, any woman trying to do well brings 'em out of the woodwork in droves. It's not limited to racing. As the old saying goes, women's place is in the wrong. On the one hand, a hundred years of telling women they're just not up to it, then when women do the job professionally and successfully, a thousand new reasons suddenly appear why it's not 'real'.

Hey, just to add insult to injury, chaps, she was (whether anyone was aware of it or not) wearing the traditional feminist colours of white (purity), purple (dignity) and green (growth). Yay! Onya Michelle!

Mena Reno:

05 Nov 2015 7:28:50am

Atracting "anti-woman sentiment" is the purpose of this deliberately inflammatory article. The feminists at the ABC will have to find another outlet for their screeching if they can't drum up enough 'misogyny' to justify their delusional convictions that oppression of women can be found under every grain of sand if only you look. It's no surprise feminism has come to this. It was always going to be difficult to shift the goalposts indefinitely.

But that hasn't stopped them. In starting with the premise that all men oppress all women as a function of their gender, the result can't ever be different. The facts or details of any particular act of 'oppression' don't really matter to the feminists. Oppression of women is everywhere, they claim, so any event at any time under any circumstances whether women are involved or not is a usable pointing and shrieking platform. If the facts get in the way, so goes the strategy, no matter, simply ignore them. Oppression is everywhere, they say, so all that matters is shaping the narrative to suit.

It's all getting a bit tired, this "first woman to..." flamebait. It's not journalism, it's not 'analysis' and it's not fooling anyone any more. But do keep at it. Women are starting to see that feminists are, in fact, the greatest misogynists and oppressors of women. In beginning with the presumption that all women are oppressed and inferior, their conclusions can never be otherwise. Women have and will always do great things, if only these 'journalists' would stop telling them that women can't.

Dove:

Mena Reno:

05 Nov 2015 1:40:36pm

No Dove, I got that out of wider research and analysis, about the author, the publication, their motives, their political positions and their influence...as well as reading the article. Try it, it's sooo much better than 'girl wins horse race and tells boys to get stuffed'.

Dove:

05 Nov 2015 2:34:48pm

I'm not sure I'll be trying anything of yours in the near future. If you want to unburden yourself with "inflammatory, screeching, misogyny, delusional, oppression (and) shrieking" commentary, no-one can stop you. But without a reference, citation or even inverted commas we just read a hysterical tirade from someone who has their own reasons as to why they can't abide a woman winning a horse race. The rest of don't mind and just think she's done well. Like another generation used to say, if you can't find anything positive to say about someone, don't say anything

Mena Reno:

05 Nov 2015 5:15:25pm

Thanks for the lesson in negativity and how to comment to suit tour particular sensitivities. The ABC doesn't allow citations, and blocks most references in the comments - which of course anyone who's tried this would know. Speak for yourself anyway. You are not the "rest of us", nor do you own the narrative. Just because you don't agree with what's been written doesn't make it negative like your own comment. The commentary is also not unilateral in the way you claim. If it's words you're trying to police then perhaps a nickname like 'Word Police' might give people a heads-up on your approach.

Mark of SA:

Excellent result. An indication that gender segregation should be forever removed from all sport. It's well past time when gender should ever be a factor in selecting a sportsperson for anything.

There are some women who are better than most men, just as there are some men better than most women. Time to throw away the outmoded view that women and men should not be in equal and open competition.

Cass:

04 Nov 2015 9:57:56pm

Many years ago I watched male jockeys struggling to meet their weight targets and I wondered why women weren't given the job. More recently I've watched women jockeys at country race meetings take race after race, and wondered why they weren't in the city races. Now I know; it takes time to knock down artificial barriers, and that slow pace has been given a massive kick along by a country kid who knows horses and how to ride them. Way to go, Michelle!

Christine:

Forrest Gardener:

Good for her, and good on those who reportedly refused to allow her to be taken off the ride because of her gender.

But then again, did the trainer simply prefer her to other available candidates on other criteria? Nobody will ever know based on this article. A striking omission from an alleged journalist.

I have also fought battles for my daughters. Nobody was going to stop them doing what they wanted to do just because they were girls. Not if I had anything to do with it.

As for those who make a profession out of being perpetually offended and those seek to use their gender to secure an advantage as so many female authors do? Well, to use the phrase de jour, they can get stuffed. You drag others down every time sisters.

foxlike:

05 Nov 2015 11:26:40am

Oh how I agree with the wrongness of using gender to gain an advantage! Oh...hullo?! Men have been doing it since time immemorial. Apparently they have something called 'merit', which is defined by its absence in women.

Forrest Gardener:

Mena Reno:

05 Nov 2015 8:53:36am

This will hopefully be the year of reckoning in Australian journalism, year we're all put out of the feminists misery. I long for the day that women can be allowed by other women to act from their own volition, without forever having to do everything for and according to Team Woman. It must be exhausting, trying to meet the never-satisfied demands of an ever-oppressed class. No wonder women are unhappier, less satisfied, more stressed and suffering from mental illness in greater numbers than ever.

It's a cruel trick these women are playing on women - highlighting their insecurities then leveraging them to build a false sense of triumphalism. Men and women everywhere know that a woman can ride a winning horse if that's what she wants and pays the dues necessary to be a winning rider, just as they know women can do anything within their capabilities if they have the minerals to do so, but forcing them to do so using the press of Team Woman expectations because undeserving womenwant the triumph of victory without the effort is as cruel as it's possible to be.

I hope one day women will be allowed to set their own goals and meet them using their own gifts and abilities under their own steam and according to their own self-identified needs. Perhaps this is the year the feminists stop treating adult women like the children they once were. That's be a reckoning, and a team worth joining.

Glenn Wilson:

05 Nov 2015 9:29:47am

How long will it take then for the horse racing industry and the wider community to ban the whipping of the victim, the horse. Abuse and violence is not so cool these days yet millions of intelligent, articulate people seem to think it is okay to whip a horse who has given its best physically despite there being abundant evidence that whipping doesn't improve the horse's winning chances.

Christine:

05 Nov 2015 10:19:47am

Glen Wilson I applaud your courage in asking people to come face to face with the truth. It's difficult when everyone is just part of a race. They all have agendas. They are a lot driven by greed. They refuse to come face to face with reality because somewhere in the back of their brains, they know that if they do, they risk losing everything that their agendas are driving towards. Money, image keeping, things like that. Keeping up appearances was a great English comedy. But on a serious note, the message of that uk production was profound. Until you come face to face with yourself, you can never truly laugh! Not from the heart anyway. And what is that good old saying? Laughing is the best medicine. Apple a day only keeps the doctor away. From a health point of view, I choose laughter over Apple. Health before all that's why! Cheers for a great day.

v:

Maxx:

05 Nov 2015 11:17:18am

This article undermines the achievement by focussing on gender equality. Michelle Payne may have beer upset with her treatment but under the circumstances it might have been more prudent to say nothing and let the result speak for itself.

whippet:

05 Nov 2015 11:33:22am

good article and a great win for a close family and well deserving, great speech too! I was happy for them but not just due to the jockey being female but in the hope that it might pave the way for change particularly with the use and very often over-use of the whip. To have a jockey even talk about that is an advance in itself. If we must have this spectacle let's lessen the suffering of the horses - start with banning the whip and increasing penalties for over-use in the meantime - then look at handicaps and age. Any jockey who even floats concerns about the whip gets my vote! And let's have a Cup next year, if we must, with NO deaths or injuries!

William:

05 Nov 2015 12:37:16pm

I'm sorry, but why is it special that a woman won the Melbourne Cup? Given that there has been legislated equality for several decades, you'd think it would've been sooner. If women want to be treated equally and don't want to admit their biological differences (that sex is a biological construct and not a social one), then articles like this shouldn't need to be written. I am please for all women that she won the cup, but I feel most women lack the drive to do similar feats due to the lack of drive created by biology (ie testosterone). As I hear the feminists say "wrong, it's the patriarchy" I can only wonder why women still chose not to go into the STEM fields in the same numbers as those women in repressed developing world countries... Basically women in developed countries complain about inequality, although do nothing to change themselves like their sisters do in the third world.

Since the airing of the gut-wrenching documentary Leaving Neverland, many of us have wrestled with an uncomfortable, yet essential question: given everything we know, can we continue listening to Michael Jackson's music?